River Valley (Please view large)

I'm curious what you think about the dead tree. Should I remove it?

I would appreciate your opinions and comments.

Hmmm, I find the dead tree very natural and fits the scene, I'm undecided about the twig in the upper left corner.  Seems there should either be more of it or none.  I'd like to hear other opinions, but this is a splendid view and an excellent landscape...  Mike

What a great view.  I like it. 

Were it mine I would leave the dead tree in but remove the leaves & twigs  in upper left. That could be done by cloning sky over it or by deciding to narrow the crop on the left side and just leave them out.

Regards,

Jerry Matchett

Christal.  Nice image.  I too would remove the branches at upper left.  As for the tree, it's too bad it's dead center, but might create too much of a mess removing it.  You could use the contact aware tool in CS6 or CS5 and remove at least half of it.  You'll have to be careful to make it look natural at the top.  You can do all of this on a copy of the image, so you don't mess around with the original.    Thanks for your recent visits to my images.   Best to you. Larry

Well, it seems it's unanimous about the leaves in the upper left.  I think you're right about that.  As for the dead tree, I already cropped a lot of it off from the top.....it had extended into the trees on the shore above it.  I tried to make it as natural looking on the top as I could. 

I'm actually going to re-work this entire image.  I'm now looking at this image on a different computer, and I see a lot of pixelation on the ridge of the mountains, which looks like over-sharpening.  I had a hard time getting this to look the way it's supposed to.  For some reason when I loaded it to PN it got soft, so I oversharpened it to compensate.  I'll keep working on it.

Thank you all for your input.

Crystal, you will be amazed at how much easier the eye moves into the photograph without the dead tree.

It is not difficult to clone out. Use a semi-hard brush, I used 50%, that is only slightly larger than the width of the trunk. Be sure to move your pickup point frequently. Pickup and dot, pickup and dot rather than drag. If you do that you will not get repeating patterns. Be very careful when crossing the shore lines, especially the closer shore since the tree overlaps a thicker shape right at the shore line. I would also clone back the green tree next to it so that it separates from the shore line by a half inch or so, enough that there is a clear division between the top of the tree and the waterline. Removing those two is only slightly more difficult than removing the leaves in the upper left corner.

The trees are a barrier. They do not stop the eye movement into the image, to the primary interest, the river, but they do cause the eye to pause and mentally short out the shoreline. Sometimes we have a limited point of view. I do not know this situation but a point of view from higher or from farther to the left assuming there were no other objects that would create a barrier would have been better. As I say, sometimes we don't have options. In those cases we have to give our photographs in post processing what nature wouldn't.

Christal, if I may venture some opinions, not carved in stone. I am aware I like my photographs darker than most people and I have little regard for 'true' color. Light, dark and color are tools that I use to emphasize what I want the viewer to see. I use darkness to deemphasize what is not important. This may be in no way what you would wish to do with your photograph but it might be interesting to compare.

I have downloaded and played with your photograph. I like to do that if I am going to make suggestions. I want to see if what I am thinking seems to work. I removed both the trees on the left. I am sorry but that dead tree in particular really fights the movement in your photograph. Removing both helps it even more. Then I darkened the photograph by using Nik Color Efex Pro. You can do similar in PS. I used the Polerazition tool to darken the sky and take some of the glare off the water. It actually brought some wisps of clouds. Then I used the Graduated Neutral Density to darken the foreground even more. What I ended up with is a silver ribbon of water flowing through your image. With your permission I would be glad to post for a comparison if you would like.

I need to practice (I'm a violinist) this evening, so I don't have time to respond properly to you at the moment.  Thanks SO much for the time you've spent on this.  And just for the record, you never need to ask my permission to post your version of my work.   I'm grateful for your efforts, and I value constructive criticism.  But thanks for asking.  :-)  I look forward to seeing what you've done.

Here is the darker version. If you do not like this that is not a problem. As I always say, this is simply opinion. LOL

This is why photographers should always have a chainsaw in their photo bag.  Personally, I'd rather not have the dead tree -- it just hinders moving around in the frame.  Regarding the leaves in the upper left, I'd try to have more (next time) rather than none at all -- it spices up the composition considerably.

Gary......Please never apologize for editing my images.  That's the way I learn best.  I can see the possibilities.  Even if I don't agree with everything someone recommends, it helps to 'discuss' and dissect images, trying different things.  I like the darker version, and I particularly like the polarizer effect.  Come to think of it, it was such a bright day.....not sure why I didn't think to use a polarizer to begin with.  I use Elements 10 for editing, and I'm not sure it has that feature, but I'll check.  Bottom line.....I think I'm going to start over with this image when I get the chance.  Thanks for all your efforts on my behalf.

Stephen.....what brand of chain saw do you recommend?  :-)  Seriously, I am coming around to agreeing that the tree has to go.  It's such a lovely meandering part of the river, and the tree does interfere.  Thanks for your input.